During the summer of 1966 Wilmut spent 8 weeks working in the laboratory of Christopher Polge, who is credited with developing the technique of cryopreservation in 1949.[11] The following year, Wilmut joined Polge's laboratory to undertake a research PhD, from which he graduated in 1971. Wilmut has since been involved in research focusing on gametes and embryogenesis including working at the Roslin Institute.[8]

Wilmut was the leader of the research group that in 1996 first cloned a mammal, a lamb named Dolly.[2][3] when she died in 2003 he said that it was because of a respiratory disease and not that she was a clone. However, in 2008 Wilmut announced that he is to abandon the technique of nuclear transfer by which Dolly was created in favour of an alternative technique developed by Shinya Yamanaka. This method has been used in mice to derive pluripotent stem cells from differentiated adult skin cells, thus circumventing the need to generate embryonic stem cells. Wilmut believes that this method holds greater potential for the treatment of degenerative conditions such as Parkinson's disease and to treat stroke and heart attack patients.[12]

"Dolly was a bonus, sometimes when scientists work hard, they also get lucky, and that's what happened."[1]

Wilmut has been accused of accepting disproportionate credit for his contribution to the development of Dolly. Former employees of the Roslin Institute claim that Wilmut is “self-confessed charlatan” who “apparently lacks adequate scientific understanding”.[13] These employees, who were not directly involved in the creation of Dolly, have signed a petition for the Queen to withdraw Wilmut's knighthood.[14] Indeed, Wilmut admits to having played only a supervisory role in the creation of Dolly, crediting his colleague Keith Campbell with "66 per cent" of the work.[15] This supervisory role however is consistent with the post of principal investigator held by Wilmut at the time of Dolly's creation.

Prof Wilmut currently holds the post of Chair of Reproductive Biology at the Medical Research Council Centre for Regenerative Medicine in Edinburgh and in 2008 was knighted in the New Year Honours for "services to science".[9]

From Wikiquote

Dr. Ian Wilmut (born 1944-07-07) is an English embryologist best known as the leader of
the group that in 1996 first cloned a mammal, a sheep named Dolly,
from fully differentiated adult mammary cells.

Sourced

Magazine interviews.

It is quite likely that it is possible, yes. But what we've
said all along -- speaking for both the (Roslin) Institute and the
PPL staff - is that we would find it ethically unacceptable to
think of doing that. We can't think of a reason to do it. If there
was a reason to copy a human being, we would do it, but there
isn't.

As quoted in "Dr. Frankenstein, I Presume?" by Andrew Ross in
Salon (February 1997)

Radio program.

I'd remind you that in these experiments so far, about one
quarter of the lambs that were born alive died within a few days
because they hadn't completed normal development. Now, what may be
being suggested here is that copies of children would be being
produced, and some of those would die soon after birth. So I think
that for a clinician to be suggesting doing that is a quite
appalling and sad thing for him to be suggesting.

I think the initial reason why I became interested in farming
is that I wanted to be outdoors. I've always enjoyed being
outdoors. And so, I looked around and when I was at high school,
probably 14 or so, my parents through friends arranged for me to be
able to go work on farms on the weekend.

Is this sort of thing which has been thought about beneficial?
So that if you're asking the question, for example, "Is it
appropriate to think of making a copy of a person?" You have to ask
not only, "What is the benefit to the people who are asking for
this to be done?" But also, "What's the impact on the child that's
going to be produced?" And that last bit I think often gets missed
out.